OSWALD IN THE DOORWAY- the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign by Ralph Cinque

www.oswald-innocent.com

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

John Armstrong:

Ralph, I admire your tenacity in collecting minute data regarding the identity of the Man in the Doorway. It is these numerous pieces of evidence that often point us in the right direction. The manner in which Ball was questioning Arce is very suspicious. And even more suspicious is the date of Arce's employment at TSBD. Any knowledge of his previous or post work history?

How do you know Ball was CIA connected?

Thanks for the picture of Frank Sturgis and Remegio Arce. Frank Fiorini (Sturgis) was a very dangerous man.

Ralph Cinque:

John, I'll get back to you about Joseph Ball's CIA connections. But, the amazing thing about the stark contrast in the way Joseph Ball handled Billy Lovelady and Danny Arce is that with Lovelady he was coy as can be, not asking him about Doorman directly, but slyly having him draw an arrow to himself, while with Arce he went straight to it: "You see this guy here? Who is he?" He had him answer out loud- no worries. The contrast in the approach he took could not have been greater. However, IT WAS THE SAME DAY! April 7, 1964, Lovelady at 2:15 and Arce at 3:45.

Ball had complete confidence that Arce would give him the answer that he wanted but no confidence that Lovelady would. And Ball was right to be suspicious of Lovelady. The fact is that Lovelady had NEVER claimed to be Doorman up to that point. There were references to him having identified himself as Doorman to the FBI, but they came from the FBI. They were FBI statements- not Billy Lovelady statements.

But, when Lovelady drew his arrow to another figure in CE 369 to indicate himself, Joseph Ball must have freaked. He probably nearly soiled his pants. And then afterwards, he undoubtedly spoke to some people who spoke to some other people, who sent some big men in dark suits and sunglasses and gruff voices to talk to Lovelady. And I'm sure they made him an offer he couldn't refuse. Then, the following month, May 1964, Lovelady gave his first interview to a reporter, Jones Harris, in which he claimed, for the first time, to be Doorman. John, it was dastardly wicked, and I actually feel a little sorry for Lovelady because he didn't want to do it, and he wasn't very good at lying about it. Odds are very great that Lovelady was killed before the HSCA Final Report came out in 1979. And that's because there was a lot in there about him, and they knew that there would be people who would want to talk to him, get him to make a statement, and they could not risk that.

The little discreet line on the forearm of Black Hole Man is the tail of Lovelady's arrow. The head was in the black space of the enclosed arms, and I'm sure they smeared it out- if it was visible.

What a stupid moron! I was trying to show that Danny Arce looked older than 18. So, to do it, I put him alongside two youth who were known to be 18. What in tarnation is gay about that? Is Backes out of his mind? At another time, I sought pictures of babies to compare to the Towner baby. Does that mean that I am sexually aroused by babies?And, the affidavit that Danny Arce signed didn't ask for anything about his race. In his own handwriting and without provocation, Arce wrote in "w/m 18" for white male age 18.

Here is the affidavit of Joe Molina. It's typed, but you'll see hand-written "H/M". Hispanic male? I'll hone in for you:

That sure looks like Hm to me. If not, what is it? I have now looked at a great many of the JFK witness affidavits. Quite a few did not include a racial designation at all. For Junior Jarman, it said c/m, therefore "colored" was what it meant. But again, many had nothing. Here is Mary Bledsoe's affidavit which says appropriately w/f. But, she is someone whose very existence Joseph Backes doubts. Idiot.

This is Danny Arce's actual handwritten affidavit, and it turns out that, without prompting, he wrote in the abbreviation for white male. It was he who did it. He wasn't required to do it. It wasn't even designated on the paper. He just put it in.

So much for your theory, Backass, that the Dallas Police had the policy of designating all Hispanic people as white. As I said in my previous post, you pulled that from straight out your ass. You're a lying sack of shit, Backes. You're not a researcher. You're just a wicked, blood-soaked Kennedy-killer.

This is an exchange between me and one asdfg on Amazon forum about Danny Arce. I don't know who asdfg is except that he's on the side of JFK truth.asdfg says:

Ralph,

The Danny Arce situation, if true, is extremely interesting.

Arce, however, told FBI agents he was standing on the grassy area directly in front of the TSBD. He thought the shots came from the direction of the railroad tracks near the parking lot at the west end of the Depository Building (*Rush to Judgement* pg. 111).

If Arce was CIA connected and the CIA was out to frame Oswald, wouldn't it have made sense for Arce to say the shots came from an upper floor at the east end of the TSBD?

Yes, asdfg, but the same applies to others. Bill Shelley also said that the shots came from the knoll. It was decided that such testimony would be explained away by saying that because of echoes from the tall buildings, people could easily be mistaken about the direction from which the gunshots came. Despite saying that he was at the west end of the building, Danny Arce was actually in front of the Dal Texas building east of the TSBD on Houston Street.

None of our adversaries have ever denied that that's Danny Arce. Some have denied that he's holding a walkie -talkie, as we allege, but not that it's him.

Note that, although it was a warm sunny afternoon, Danny Arce wore a heavy black coat, and we can see it on the guy with the walkie-talkie. You can also see that the hairline matches.

So, that was definitely Danny Arce. To deny it is to claim that there was another guy who dressed like that and looked like that, that there was a Danny Arce double in Dealey Plaza. And that is ridiculous. So, Danny Arce lied about his location during the shooting. And that's not all he lied about. He lied about who Doorman was. From where Danny Arce was standing, he had a good close look at that doorway. He had to see and know that Oswald was standing there. His exchange with Joseph Ball about it had to be the most leading, most rehearsed, most orchestrated testimony in the Warren Report. Ball KNEW what Danny Arce was going to say, and it's obvious. It's like they rehearsed it ahead of time. And I'm sure they did.

Joseph Backes is on a campaign now of casting me as a homosexual. He says that because I picked these two examples of 18 year olds to compare to Danny Arce from 11/22/63 that I must be sexually attracted to them.

In fact, I went to Google and did an image search for 18 year old boys and got this:

The two I picked were in the 2nd and 3rd rows. The way I picked them is that in their blurbs, it specifically said that they were 18 years old. Not all of them had that.

Like this one, for instance;

Of course, it doesn't matter because no matter which ones I used, Backes was going to resort to gay-baiting. What else has he got? The point remains that Danny Arce looks older than 18 on 11/22/63.

Next, Backes calls me a racist for not liking the term African-American. It's true that I don't like the term and it's because this woman is also an African-American.

And I'll admit, Backes, that I think Charlize Theron is very attractive, but I am very content with beautiful Linda, so it's not a problem for me.

My reasoning is that since Caucasian people are still referred to as "white" and not "European-American" that the term "black" should also be acceptable, as it was for many decades. But, Joseph Backes, who has lost EVERY battle with me- not most of them, but every single one of them, including major and minor ones, has got no other recourses but gay-baiting and race-baiting.Then finally, Joseph Backes makes the outrageous claim that the Dallas Police habitually referred to Hispanic people as "white". That is preposterous. Racism against Hispanics in Dallas was rampant in the 1960s. Dan Molina, who worked at the TSBD, was the head of a civil rights organization in Dallas, one that worked to overcome prejudice, including police prejudice, against Hispanics.The article below claims just the opposite, that nationally in the 1960s, the term "black" was used inclusively for all people of color. http://www.ehow.com/list_7380602_race-used-1960-birth-certificates.htmlWhere is the evidence that Dallas Police referred to Hispanics as white? That's what Joseph Backes claimed, and I say he pulled it out his ass. So, you provide some reference for that, Backes. Provide a link. Do it now. Because as things stand, it only shows that you are a liar, that you said it without the slightest factual basis. I DEMAND to see a reference for it, as I am accusing you of making it up.

Remember Anthony Marsh? The idiot who thinks that Oswald didn't shoot Kennedy but did shoot and kill Tippit? Well, he came up with another zinger on McAdams' forum:Anthony Marsh: The Secret Service stole JFK's body because Jackie would not leave Dallas without him and LBJ would not leave Dallas without Jackie.Ralph Cinque: What? They stole JFK's body so that they could alter it. They expanded the tracheotomy that Perry made- to the point that Humes didn't even recognize it as a bullet hole. He only learned about it the next day by talking to Perry on the phone. And that was just one thing they did. Why didn't Humes demand to go back in and track that bullet? What autopsist would just assume that the bullet hole he found in the man's back must have come out the throat when it struck at a steeply downward angle and was never deflected? It would be an autopsist who realized that the powers-that-be wanted it a certain way, and he best not interfere.The one and only thing LBJ wanted Jackie for was to stand next to him at the swearing-in ceremony and be photographed. She legitimized the whole thing. BUT, THE SWEARING-IN TOOK PLACE IN DALLAS. It wasn't done in Washington, and it wasn't done in the air. Once he was sworn in, LBJ didn't need Jackie for squat.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Keep it up, Backes. Everyone knows that you are a fake CT. You are the poster boy for the bizarre world of fake CTs.

Backes is also the idiot who thinks that a big elaborate and theatrical tale of Oswald's transportation was concocted the very afternoon of the assassination by Dallas Police, involving phony witnesses, phony evidence, and more, and yet, he refuses to consider that Danny Arce may have lied about his age. His affidavit says that he was white, male, and 18.

w/m/18 White, male and 18. Right? Well, was he white?

Backass complained that I compared him to two white 18 year olds. So, even the evil God-damn proscenim-stuffer admits he wasn't white. Yet, it says white, which was wrong. Maybe the 18 was wrong too. Mark Valenti posted the following on Education Forum:

On November 3, 1995, the FBI released some files to NARA which it had held back for one reason or another.

This came at a time when, due to the JFK Assassination Records Act, the CIA and other governmental bodies also were releasing previously secret documents.

Among the newly released FBI documents were files on:

James AngletonMorris Block, a Russian defectorRonnie Caire and Frank DeLa Barre, both involved in the anti-Castro movementMartin Fox, owner of a nightclub in CubaQJ/WINThe Anti-Communist International BrigadeThomas Edward Beckham, friend of Ferrie and involved in anti-Castro activitiesAND>>>>>>Danny Arce.

So, why the hell did the FBI have a secret file on Danny Arce? And by the way, the emphasis above was by Mark Valenti, not me. So, even he was shocked that such a file should exist. Because Danny Arce was just a regular, ordinary 18 year old Dallasite who happened to work at the TSBD. Right? Isn't that what Joseph Backes wants you to believe?Backes, why do you call yourself a CT? You are NOT a CT. You are a LN, a lying LN. You're a LLN. That's what you are. And here is how the great Jack White responded to that:Does anyone have this document?

JackWhat a contrast to Backes, eh? You think maybe Jack White had a different attitude, a different mindset than the Proscenium-stuffer? Danny Arce lied under oath. He said Doorman was Billy Lovelady, but he had to know better. Arce saw them both that morning and worked with them both that morning. He saw how they were dressed. Doorman looks gaunt and slender- like Oswald- not husky like Lovelady was at the time. Joseph Ball asked Danny Arce directly who Doorman was, which was something he did not do with Billy Lovelady. Why was Ball tepid with Lovelady- cautious to the extreme, making him respond non-verbally by drawing an arrow. Draw an arrow to yourself in the photo? DRAW A FUCKING ARROW TO YOURSELF IN THE PHOTO? Who does that? Who proceeds that way? Why didn't Ball just ask Lovelady the way he asked Arce?Mr. BALL. Just 1 minute, I want to show you a picture. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 369. I show you this picture. See this man in this picture? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. Recognize him? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Just to identify it clearly, the man on the steps---well, you see the man on the steps, do you not? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. He is a white man, isn't he? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And you see his picture just above the picture of two colored people, is that correct; would you describe it like that? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. I am not going to mark this purposely because other witnesses have to see it. Mr. ARCE. Yes. Mr. BALL. Did you say that is Billy Lovelady? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that is Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Now, there is only one face that is clearly shown within the entrance-way of the Texas School Book Depository Building, isn't there? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And only one face of a person who is standing on the steps of the Depository Building entrance? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. And that one man you see there--- Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Why was Ball so direct with Arce? He was leading him through the questioning like he was Arce's own lawyer doing something they rehearsed. Where did that confidence come from? Why did Ball feel safe enough with Arce to just point to Doorman and ask, "Recognize him?" Why didn't he do exactly the same with Lovelady? Why with Lovelady was it instead, "Draw an arrow to yourself." What the fuck? Since Ball presumed that Doorman was Lovelady, who was going to be better at recognizing Lovelady than Lovelady? Why didn't he just ask Lovelady directly the way he asked Arce?Now compare the dates: Lovelady was interviewed by Joseph Ball on April 7, 1964 at 2:15 PM, while Danny Arce was interviewed by Joseph ball on April 7, 1964 at 3:50 PM. IT WAS THE SAME FUCKING DAY, JUST AN HOUR AND A HALF APART!

So, after playing that fucking game with Lovelady having him draw an arrow, and never asking him directly if he was Doorman, and never pointing out and distinguishing Doorman the way he did later with Arce, that shortly afterwards, Ball rolled up his sleeves and went straight for the jugular with Arce. He honed right in: the one and only male face that you can see in the doorway, above the two "colored" persons, distinguishing him as white, letting the whole world know that they were talking about the Man in the Doorway, and that the man was Lovelady. So, why did Ball play footsie about it with Lovelady just an hour and a half earlier? Why didn't he approach it the same way with both of them?Mr. BALL - I have got a picture here, Commission Exhibit 369. Are you on that picture? Mr. LOVELADY - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Take a pen or pencil and mark an arrow where you are. Mr. LOVELADY - Where I thought the shots are? Mr. BALL - No; you in the picture. Mr. LOVELADY - Oh, here (indicating). Mr. BALL - Draw an arrow down to that; do it in the dark. You got an arrow in the dark and one in the white pointing toward you. Where were you when the picture was taken?But, that vast difference in approach on the very same day between the two men doesn't bother you at all, does it Backes? You'll defend Arce, won't you? You'll defend Joseph Ball, won't you? You'll defend Will Fritz for lying about what Oswald said he was doing at the time of the assassination, won't you? You filthy, dirty, blood-soaked Kennedy-killing bastard; that is what you are, Backes. But, keep it up about Arce, Backass. Keep defending him. Let's keep arguing about this. Because we have raised more questions and more suspicions about Danny Arce than have ever been raised before in 50 years. Do a search for Danny Arce JFK on Google. This blog shows up on the 2nd page. My Facebook page shows up on the 4th page. Your stupid hate site doesn't show up at all; but still, you're helping me get the word out about this, and a lot has been accomplished in the last few days. So keep it up; we're talking Danny Arce.

Over on McAdams' forum, Walt made the interesting and astute observation that Danny Arce looks older than 18 in his photos from 11/22/63, although that is his reported age at the time. But, making him that young- seemingly only a boy- would certainly tend to defuse the suspicion that he was any kind of agent or operative. Here is Danny Arce from that day alongside two other youth who both happen to be 18.

I must agree that he does look older than 18. There isn't a hint of boyishness in his face as there is in the other two. I often remind people: this is the JFK assassination we are talking about, and it is so riddled with lies and fabrications that we really shouldn't accept anything they say carte blanche. To real JFK truthers, not for a second do we put it past them to lie about so small a thing as this.

It's amazing that Joseph Backes keeps accusing me of ripping off photos from internet sites when he helps himself to any photo of mine with complete abandon. The hypocrisy of it is breathtaking.But, regarding Herminio Diaz Garcia being a JFK shooter, it wasn't just Remigio Arce who said so. As late as 2007, Reinaldo Martinez, an anti-Castro Cuban who spent some time in a Cuban prison, contacted HSCA chief counsel G. Robert Blakeley about it. Martinez had a cellmate, Tony Cuesto, who had been told directly by Diaz Garcia that he had been an assassin. Blakeley believed him and so did JFK author Anthony Summers who interviewed Martinez.. Here's an article about it:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2463291/Was-Cuban-Herminio-Diaz-second-Kennedy-assassin.html#ixzz2hvTQ1dJ7

Of course, my interest is primarily in Danny Arce and his role in the assassination, and what we have that is rock-solid is a good visible match between him and a figure at a CIA training camp on a Florida key in 1962, and we also have a good visible match between a figure next to him and another figure in Dealey Plaza. And that doubling of the matches makes it logarithmic on the mathematical side, as Richard Charnin explained.

So, go fuck yourself with a proscenium arch, Backes. We've got Danny Arce pegged as a CIA operative. He was placed at the TSBD at the same time Oswald was precisely to facilitate the JFK assassination. There he is in Dealey Plaza in his heavy coat on a 70+ degree afternoon, keeping his communication device out of sight. And it makes his exchange with Joseph Ball about Doorman laughable. You think maybe Ball knew what he was going to say? That's Billy Lovelady my ass. The realization that Danny Arce was a CIA operative casts the following testimony in a whole different light:Mr. BALL. Just 1 minute, I want to show you a picture. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 369. I show you this picture. See this man in this picture? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. Recognize him? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Just to identify it clearly, the man on the steps---well, you see the man on the steps, do you not? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. He is a white man, isn't he? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And you see his picture just above the picture of two colored people, is that correct; would you describe it like that? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. I am not going to mark this purposely because other witnesses have to see it. Mr. ARCE. Yes. Mr. BALL. Did you say that is Billy Lovelady? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that is Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Now, there is only one face that is clearly shown within the entrance-way of the Texas School Book Depository Building, isn't there? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And only one face of a person who is standing on the steps of the Depository Building entrance? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. And that one man you see there--- Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. When you came to work that morning, Danny---

Monday, April 28, 2014

I found the image of Frank Sturgis and Remigio Arce, both anti-Castro Cubans:

And here is Remegio Cuku Arce alone.

And do you know who Remegio Cuku Arce said was one of the JFK assassins? It's someone whom many people think was one of the JFK assassins. I'm talking about another anti-Castro Cuban by the name of Herminio Diaz Garcia.

I am sorry for the crumby picture, but it's all I could find. Here's the bio of Diaz from Spartacus:
Herminio Diaz Garcia was born in Cuba in 1923. He was a member of the Cuban Restaurant Workers Union and worked as a cashier at the Hotel Habana-Rivera. Later he became involved in illegal activities and eventually became a bodyguard for Santos Trafficante.
Diaz Garcia killed Pipi Hernandez in 1948 at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico. In 1957 he was involved with an assassination attempt against President Jose Figures of Costa Rica.
Diaz Garcia moved to the United States in July, 1963, where he worked for Tony Varona. Some researchers believe that Diaz Garcia was one of the gunman who killed John F. Kennedy on 22nd November, 1963.
In December, 1963, Diaz Garcia was involved in an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Fidel Castro. He was also involved in providing weapons to anti-Castro groups.
Diaz Garcia was killed on a mission at Monte Barreto in the Miramar district of Cuba on 29th May, 1966. Tony Cuesta was captured during the mission. Cuesta, who always vowed that Castro would never take him alive, attempted suicide by setting off a grenade, which blinded him and blew off his right hand. Cuesta spent a long time in hospital as a result of his serious injuries. Herminio Diaz Garcia is buried in Columbus, Havana.

Now, here's something eerie: Danny Arce's full name was Danny Garcia Arce. Imagine if he was related to both of them. How involved in the JFK assassination would that make him?

Well, it costs a lot of money to make a movie. So, I can understand that David LaTourneau had to raise it. And he did offer gifts and other benefits to people who contributed.On the other hand, it costs nothing to operate a blog on BlogSpot, and yet Joseph Backes still asks for money. On his hate site against me, he is still begging for a handout:

He changed it to make it look like he's just looking for a token gift to show your support of him in his vendetta against me. But take a look at his other site:

He's still looking for serious money over there, even though it's still just a BlogSpot blog which costs absolutely nothing. So, what did I have to say about your begging, Backes? I said that the very existence of it is grounds for vilification and contempt. You certainly have no reason to beg for money. You are employed as a "civil servant", remember? You are paid a salary. Why don't you just go to an intersection with a sign and a cup? You are just taking advantage of people, ripping them off. The SOB even maintains a merchant account to process donations. Now, if you have any decency and self-respect, or for that matter a conscience, then you, Joseph Backes, remove those requests for money from your websites and issue a public apology. Then return any and all money you received with a personal apology to the senders. Do it or don't do it, but it's hanging over your head.

So says Rob Clark, but I'll tell you what he's famous for. He posted this below claiming it was the same shirt pattern.

Do you see that Lovelady's shirt on the right has vertical lines? Do you see any vertical lines on Doorman's shirt? And notice that the horizontal white lines on Lovelady's shirt are all very delicate, like pinstripes. So, even if you think you see horizontal lines on Doorman's shirt, they are too bulky to correspond to what we see on Lovelady's. Those patterns do not match at all, yet Rob Clark failed to see it. Now let's put Doorman alongside Lovelady whom Rob Clark said he clearly is.

The image on the right was taken just minutes after the Altgens photo and in the same location. How could that be Lovelady on the left when they're shirts are so different? It's not just that the patterns are different, but the whole lay and form of the shirts are different. Doorman has a huge t-shirt exposure while Lovelady has none. And we are seeing about 3/4 of Lovelady's chest there, his entire left side and some of his right. So, you can't blame it on the angle. And Rob Clark says there are no Altgens alterations. Oh really? I count 7 in that little image alone.

How come no face at all on Black Hole Man? What's that white blob below it? What's with the big hair on the African-American woman? Compare the size of her hair to that of the woman next to her. How could Roy Lewis be there as seen when we know from the Wiegman film that he was turned the other way the entire time? How come Doorman is missing his left shoulder? How could Black Tie Man be that close to Doorman where they are growing out of each other like conjoined twins? And how could the Mother be holding up that boy with one arm? Is she Superwoman?

All 7 of the doorway anomalies are screaming at us in that small image, and the full description of them can be found on the Anomalies page of the OIC site:

Rob Clark is just another modern-day Kennedy-killer, and he has never disproven a word I've said. But, upon his son's 18th birthday, that young man will be getting all his father's despicable nasty art work, of which there is plenty. You have my word.

Backes, you are only degrading yourself with your filth- not me. And it is Oswald in the doorway because the clothes do not lie. Only Oswald was dressed like that, not Lovelady. It is insane to think that Oswald and Lovelady were dressed like matching twins that day. You are fighting a very obvious manifestation of reality, and it is hopeless for you You have no chance of winning. You have already lost. The man wearing Oswald's clothes was Oswald.

Backes says I can't find a link other than the spelling of the surname, but what about this link?

Backes doesn't get it: the pictures rule. It's just like with the Altgens photo: when you see that Doorman is wearing Oswald's exact clothes: the loose-fitting, unbuttoned, outer shirt over the notched, highly exposed white t-shirt, you know it's Oswald. It's his garb.

It can't not be him; it's his clothes. It's not as though Lovelady dressed like that; only Oswald did. And with Arce, it's not as though Backes faults the likeness of the images. He doesn't say a word about it. He simply refuses to look at it, to acknowledge it. He just closes his eyes and puts his hands over his ears about it, and why? It's because he doesn't want it to be Arce. Apparently, Backes doesn't want the CIA to be involved in the JFK assassination. He calls himself a CT but notice that he never lays out his theory of the crime. Who was involved? Was LBJ? Not according to Backes. Was George HW Bush? Not according to Backes. Was J Edgar Hoover? When has Backes ever accused Hoover? Was Congressman Albert Thomas who winked at LBJ after the swearing-in? The Wink of the Century? Backes doesn't see that either. Who has Backes ever faulted? He's faulted the Dallas Police for making up a story about Oswald taking the bus and cab. But, how could they expect to get away with that? If Oswald had lived and gone to trial, he would have had a lawyer, a good lawyer. Look, Mark Lane wound up representing Oswald's mother pro bono; don't you think he would have been willing to represent Oswald? Mark Lane beat E Howard Hunt in a libel suit against Liberty Lobby. He's a great lawyer! And he would have asked Oswald what he did after the assassination and how he got to wherever he went. And Oswald would have told him the truth. Then, at trial, that elaborate lie of the Dallas Police would have unraveled, and it would been more than enough to establish reasonable doubt in the case. There was plenty more they had, but that alone would have been enough to win it. Lane and Oswald would have had them by the balls. How could the Dallas Police possibly expect to get away with such an outrageous and enormous lie? Oswald knew what he did and how he did it, and it would have been very easy to establish it. THE PHONY BUS AND CAB RIDE WOULD HAVE BECOME THE WHOLE CASE, THE BULWORK OF THE DEFENSE. Oswald would not have been on trial; the Dallas Police would have been on trial. It is stupid to think that they were that stupid to have done such a reckless and misguided thing. And on whose authorization? The killing of Kennedy wasn't a Dallas Police Department operation. So, why would it befall on them to assume responsibility for such a dangerous lie?

Then, Backes has faulted the Warren Commission for making up whole swaths of testimony, inventing dialogue for Lovelady and Shelley, creating a whole "trek to the tracks" which according to Backes never occurred. But, such a brazen fabrication would have been bizarre and reckless. Yes, the WC was corrupt, but not like that; they were subtle about it. And when has Backes made the slightest criticism of the HSCA? Look at the ridiculous conclusion they came to, that Oswald did it, but he had an accomplice on the Grassy Knoll who missed. So, there was a conspiracy, but it did not involve the FBI or the CIA or the Vice President, or any other agency or official of the government. Instead, according to the HSCA, it was the Mafia who put Oswald and his accomplice up to it.

But, could the Mafia get the parade route changed? Could the Mafia control the press? Could the Mafia accomplish the whitewash and coverup within the government? Could the Mafia control how the autopsy went?

And notice that they never alluded to any payment to Oswald for doing this dastardly job for the Mafia. Apparently, Oswald did his work for the Mafia for free- without being paid, even though he had absolutely nothing against Kennedy and was dirt poor. He just killed whomever the Mafia wanted killed because he was a Mafia man. And why the Mafia would assign Oswald to do this very difficult shooting was also not explained. Oswald was not an expert marksman, and he was not any kind of assassin. He wasn't qualified for it- not as a shooter and not as a killer, never having killed. He was never in combat in the Marines. He had never shot at a moving target- in his life. He never shot under super-tense, rapid-fire conditions. How could the Mafia put a high-powered rifle in his hands and have him start shooting in the direction of Jackie and Nellie and others they didn't want dead? Things go wrong in shootings. Didn't they know that?

And now Backes wants to defend Danny Arce, even though we can plainly see him at a CIA training camp for anti-Castro Cubans in Florida. Every CT in the world knows that anti-Castro Cubans were involved in the JFK assassination. It was central to the plot. Wasn't Jack Ruby a gun runner for the anti-Castro Cubans? What about the Houston, the Barbara, and the Zapata, the three ships involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion? Do those names mean anything to you, Backes? Are they associated with anyone you can think of? Why was Danny Arce wearing that heavy coat in Dealey Plaza? It was a warm day. He'd been doing heavy work on the 6th floor laying flooring. What would have possessed him to put that heavy coat on afterwards to watch the motorcade?

Why was Joseph Ball willing to risk everything on Arce's testimony? With Arce, Ball was direct as hell. He didn't beat around the bush. He went for the jugular. "You see this guy here? Who is he?" Ball didn't do that with Lovelady.

Mr. BALL. Just 1 minute, I want to show you a picture. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 369. I show you this picture. See this man in this picture? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. Recognize him? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Just to identify it clearly, the man on the steps---well, you see the man on the steps, do you not? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. He is a white man, isn't he? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And you see his picture just above the picture of two colored people, is that correct; would you describe it like that? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. I am not going to mark this purposely because other witnesses have to see it. Mr. ARCE. Yes. Mr. BALL. Did you say that is Billy Lovelady? Mr. ARCE. Yes, that is Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. Now, there is only one face that is clearly shown within the entrance-way of the Texas School Book Depository Building, isn't there? Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And only one face of a person who is standing on the steps of the Depository Building entrance? Mr. ARCE. Yeah. Mr. BALL. And that one man you see there--- Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady. Mr. BALL. When you came to work that morning, Danny---Danny? What the fuck? Danny? He didn't call Billy Lovelady Billy. Look how confident Ball was that "Danny" was going to deliver the answer he wanted. Look how certain he was that Danny was going to identify Doorman as Lovelady. You don't really think he took a chance on that, do you? You don't think Ball was gambling, do you? That he was rolling the dice? You don't think there is any doubt that Joseph Ball had foreknowledge of what Danny Arce's answer was going to be, do you? Danny Arce was up to his neck in the JFK assassination. This is by James Richards:Danny Arce was a young employee of the Texas School Book Depository. Not a great deal in known of his background, but after the assassination, he and Bonnie Ray Williams were taken in for questioning by the Dallas Police Department. Arce claimed that during the assassination, he was positioned near the Elm Street Extension that runs between the Texas School Book Depository and Elm Street proper. But, a man who resembled Arce was standing in front of the Dal-Tex building on Houston Street. Was he speaking into a radio device? The other individual is unknown, but his similarity to the man who trained with the Interpen group at No Name Key is striking.

This is not a Cinque thing, Backes. I am late in coming to it. You are fighting a lot of others besides me. Danny Arce was in on it, Backes. And so, in effect, are you. You are a modern-day Kennedy-killer.

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Here's another collage of Arce:

What reason does Joseph Backes have to reject this? He hasn't cited one single physical disconnection that rules them not to be the same guy. All he needs is one, but he hasn't got it. And look what the moron is doing. It would be one thing if said: "You can't be sure that's Danny Arce." But instead he says: "It can't be Arce." Well, it can be, Backass, and the odds are very great that it is. Your whole argument is resting on one thing: that you don't want it to be Danny Arce. Well, who cares what you want, Backass? I'm sure you'd like a new proscenium arch too, but it doesn't mean I'm going to buy you one. We have it referenced now that Danny Arce only started working there about the time Oswald did. We know now there was another Cuban involved who also had the name of Arce, a man in his 40s. For some reason, Backes thinks the age difference rules out any connection to Danny Arce. Was he perhaps his uncle? A cousin? It's not a big stretch, Backass. We've got Danny Arce using a communication device during the shooting, and we were not the first to suggest it. I'm finding quite a few others who have brought it up.

We've got Danny Arce in a heavy coat when it was a warm day. He'd been working on the 6th floor laying flooring with Bill Shelley, Billy Lovelady, and others. Then they broke for lunch at 11:45. At one point did Arce put that coat on, and why did he put it on when it was so warm? Here he is compared to a guy in short sleeves.

Look at the thickness of that collar! Why was he wearing such a bulky thing? I say it was to hide the communication device he was carrying and who knows what else.

Look how that heavy coat stands out. And you can't compare it to the man behind in a suit jacket because men wear suit jackets even when it's hot. This was like a heavy raincoat on Danny Arce.Look how even that loop of hair is the same. What are the odds of that?

Others besides us are onto the Arce/CIA connection. Here's a tri-collage I found, and the guy on the right is the other figure from the training camp who also appears in Altgens6.

And even Gerda Dunkel has gotten involved.

Andy Alfridi claims that Danny Arce, like Oswald, was only hired on at the TSBD several weeks before 11/22/63. Read William Westin, Backass! I'm referring to The Spider's Web: the TSBD and the Dallas Conspiracy.The Spider’s Web: The Texas School Book Depository and the Dallas ConspiracyBy William Weston

There is a very large spider guarding this web of secrecy. I have entered other webs, but this one is different because the spider leaves the web and stalks its prey – sometimes for many years.Elzie Glaze [1]

Abstract: Journalist Elzie Glaze compared the Texas School Book Depository to a spider that can leave its web and stalk its prey. This article posits the view that behind Glaze’s metaphor was a weapons and narcotics smuggling operation moving under the guise of schoolbooks. Controlled by ultraconservatives, the depository harbored spies, who infiltrated left-wing organizations. It also had law enforcement agents, who monitored and controlled the drug traffic within the city of Dallas. These operatives acted at the instigation of the national security establishment. When President Kennedy threatened to break up that establishment, a plot developed to assassinate him. The schoolbook workers became involved in the plot, when they relocated into the seven-story building that overlooked a 120-degree turn at Elm and Houston Streets. The turn made the President an easy target, because it slowed his limousine down to a crawl. After the assassination, the victors of the coup imposed extra security measures at the schoolbook depository in order to protect ongoing smuggling activities.Wake up and smell the Cuban oregano, Backass! The TSBD was a den of CIA agents, and Danny Arce was one of them. It doesn't matter where he was born. That was him at that CIA training camp in Florida, and you are a God-damn fool not to see it.

I have been informed by Walt from McAdams' forum that the two figures at the 5th floor window were Bonnie Ray Williams and Harold Norman.

This doesn't change anything because having one of the guys Oswald cited is just as good as having two. And we still have Junior Jarman's testimony in which he said that he was with Williams and Norman on the 5th floor, that the three of them went up there together. So, we might as well be seeing him. Therefore, it is still true that Fritz lied when he told the WC that Oswald said he was eating lunch with "other employees" at the time of the shooting. Everything I said about the significance of this picture remains true.

I found out that there was a Cuban named Arce who was involved in the anti-Castro Cubans operation. His full name was Remigio Arce, and his nickname was Cuku. There is a photograph somewhere of Remigio "Cuku" Arce with Frank Sturgis. Now, the question is: was Danny Arce related to Remigio Cuku Arce?

This is mathematician Richard Charnin's take on the likeness between the figure at the CIA training camp and Danny Arce.

Quick Calc ( may be too simplistic). Assume 200 in Dealey Plaza. US. pop = 200 million in 1963. Probability of a given CIA individual being in Dealey Plaza = 200/200,000,000 =1 in a million. Prob (2 in Dealey Plaza) = 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 (or 1 in a trillion)